JPD
-
Posts
709 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by JPD
-
-
Oui, c'est bon, ainsi tu es comme dans la V4, taille fixe en pixels si écran>size of slide, sinon ajustement à l'écran.
-
- "Virtual size of a slide" was a suggestion of Jean-Pierre. I implemented it for correct work of Size/Position tool window in Objects and animation editor.
- "Fixed size of slide (in pixels)" means, that slide will utilize exactly specified width/height on the screen.
I also propose "Workspace" like in Photoshop, maybe it would be better, because it's really the workspace inside of which you put your pictures.
What do you think for this name ? (In french it's "Espace de travail", not sure of my english translation).
-
Additional remark: x264.exe doesn't seem to like any input for width or height which is an odd number!
Regards,
Xaver
On others programs it don't like size which can't be divided by 16 (for instance 1920 x 1080) because the blocks inside the format, I don't know how Igor succeeded to do in order we don't have this problem.
-
I am demoralized by the behavior of certain persons who have take advantage of their administrator's possibilty to destroy in the past a post where I presented one of my slideshows.
As you can see initial post disappeared, the first message of the topic being an answer.
I thus puts back the link of the aslideshow :
-
Many people, even good users don't find easily how to use Masks, maybe a more intuitive screen and function would be useful in the final version.
-
Good decision, I hope that this will make Jean-Pierre a little bit more happy!?
I just send to Igor a mail in which I try to explain how the initial problem about Original mode can be solved.
I will be happy when the use of original mode will be the same as before, nobody had problem with it, and since we have the definition of format in pixels, it's now very simple to do :
.........................Only four "IF" function and a two divisions more, that's all.
-
Many thanks for pause button, many people are happy to have this feature, very useful.
-
JP,
Did you hear anything regarding your proposal?
Igor wrote me about it, but to day I am not sure that my proposal have been understood, he is always working on his Size position box, I am very pessimist and tired.
Many people seems not understand that we have finally a screen format very interesting for slideshow which is avalaible for many years, at least 10 or 20 years, the full HD format and we can use it without any resizing inside PTE if we use the original mode (for nominal format of course).
When you put the position of a picture in percent you aren't abble to say if each pixel of the picture if not at 0% of pan is exactly on one pixel of the screen, if not your picture's pixel will be calculated on 2 or 4 screen's pixels with a lose of quality. It's the same thing when you use Fit to slide or Cover slide, you are enabble to say if your picture is resized or not when it's on level 2, 3, 4 or more level.
Why have soo perfect camera as we have to day and add this default.
PTE, since the beginning had this wonderfull possibility that others haven't, it's now we are losing this quality, just at the moment we can use it better than never.
-
About test of beta #8, I just have test mp4 function, now I must say the result is good, better than all tests I did before to ask for 20 000 Kbps and 50/60 fps options.
Of course, today, it's difficult to use full HD at 60 fps, but it's begin to be possible, I have test during 16 hours since yesterday and have write a report in french here (haven't enough time to translate).
Bravo to Igor and team for this work. I'll test other new features to morrow.
Just a question to Igor, I did several versions of Versailles in mp4 60 fps, the one at 10 000 Kbps need less power than the both at 7 800 Kbps ant 12 000 Kbps, have you an explanation to give me, I haven't any idea why.
Note : It seems that a little bug about the frame server PictureToExe Video Codec has been fixed, there was on the left of the frame a line of one pixel grey and the picture resize inside all the other part on V5.52 and now it's perfect.
-
Peter,
Technically no problem. I'm thinking how to make it intuitive for user.
As I suggested years ago (after have made Jeu de taquin more than 4000 goto) : with $15 for absolute value and 15 for relative value, if the slide position is change, the value is change, like in Excel or others.
Also possible is to give a name to the slide and give the name in the function, always like in Excel or others.
It's the simplest way and many people use that in others programs.
-
I'll think about Pause button to implement it.
Jean-Pierre,
Ok, I'll add this option to this or next version. But I think protection option should be enabled by default.
Thanks Igor, no matter for default value, I'll put explanations about this feature on french forums.
Many thanks for the Pause button, many people will be happy
-
Here is the link to the word document about "3 modes as V5.52 with only one algorithm as V5.6" I send 5 days ago to Wnsoft, I always hope it will be useful for Wnsoft and for PTE users.
-
Jean-Pierre,
Always for all created EXE files.
If you don't put option, it would be useful to be abble to have inside the exe the possibility for author to extract like we do with the zip file the complete template, of course with a password. I made such a test in one of my slideshow, it's possible.
Sometimes people lose there templates and pictures, a crash of hard disk for example) and ask we recover there pictures, it was possible, it is not today.
-
It seems that in the O&A window it would be very helpful if you could PAUSE the animation rather than only being able to select STOP or PLAY. When you stop (after pressing play) the cursor returns to the start of the animation it would be very helpful to be able to PAUSE the cursor at any point in the animation so you could then add you keypoint at that point, this may even remove the need to see a wave form?
I agree with you, I made the same request some days ago, this feature would be useful
-
Have a good birthday
Amitiés
Jean-Pierre
-
I finally took some time to play with the demos generously posted by Lin and Andreas so that I could learn how to work with masks. The result of my learning is a short slideshow using various mask techniques to display the beauty of autumn in Northern Arizona.
http://www.mhwarner.com/azautumn.zip
I would be interested to know how it looks on smaller monitors as mine is a 19" with 1920x1200 resolution. Most of the slides were set at 1600 px width so there are black bands both side and top. I used masks to constrain the one slide with a large zoom/pan and also the last one and got them pretty close so that there is only a little perceptible change between slides.
Anyway, I hope you enjoy it.
Nice photos, but I think it's also possible to do the same thing with V5.5, but with PNG when you used JPG and mask with 5.6.
-
Beta 7:
+ Improved protection of images and music in created EXE file with slideshow against extracting.
Is it always or, as I hope, only an option ?
Thanks for mp4, must be nice, but haven't test at this moment.
-
If you use the windowed mode, as it is given in 5.5 or 5.6, the window defines a kind of screen in which the show runs, e.g. 1280x853 for a show with aspect ratio 3/2. When you run the show on your 1280x1024 screen, you will see part of your desktop outside the window in which your show runs. Not very amusing!
These 2 versions of PTE don't work the same for this function.
In V5.5, as you explained, the window can be greater than the screen and can be display on others screens, very useful for some slideshows using several video-projectors (more than 2).
In V5.6 (beta 6) the windowed mode without a border is ajusted to the screen when screen definition smaller that PTE window, also very useful sometimes and with a border, the border is full screen when screen definition no enough great and inside we have 2 black parts when the format of screen different of the format of the slideshow. Try to put a window 1920 x 1080 with a border on a 1280 x 960 screen.
It's the reason for wich there are 2 options in my proposal, both are useful sometimes.
-
Hello,
I just created a slide show w/ PTE ver 5.5. Everything went well until I previewed the show. Each slide looks overexposed by about 1 stop. The images (1280x800) look fine when using any other viewer like Photoshop, Bridge, Windows Explorer, etc.
In fact, when I select any individual slide in PTE, it looks fine in the main control panel. But when I start the slideshow, the images become over exposed. Any thoughts or ideas would be appreciated. Thanks!
I don't see anybody have this problem, PTE doesn't modify the pictures, so your problem is very incomprensible for me.
Make a screen copy and compare it with original picture in Photosop or other.
-
Thanks, I'm working with provided test projects and calculations to understand the problem.
I just send you a word document in which are all the differents posts with suggestions, it correct some suggestions we don't need since it' possible to have the 3 modes, the document is more homogen and easiest to use for you.
-
OK, we'll add new FPS presets: 24p, 50, 60.
I wrote 6 weeks ago :
About frame per second, I made hundred tests on 4 PC, and now, I am sure that it's may be enough for slideshows without anything moving, but for slideshows as Fantaisies florales where there are objects and texts moving, it's not enough, I made tests by steps of 5 fps from 25 to 100 fps, it's correct at 60 fps (of corse the frequency of the screen is at the same value), 50 fps on a 50fps TV is near OK but not perfect. Most of PC can't have less than 60 images per second but a part of them can't go at 100 images per second, so with a video at 50 fps, it's not always possible to have a smooth result, it's easier with 60 fps and on modern TV, at least in France, it's possible to choice between several values as 50 and 60 images per second, so it seem that to have a good result with slideshows with effects, the good value is 60 fps.
I have made many tests with other tools to do MP4 at these differents values, and it's possible to have 60 fps on 1 250 000 pixels format (for instance 1280 x 960), above the power of actual PC isn't enough, it will be probably possible later (1, 2 or 3 years). It would be nice to have this possibility with PTE ( made test at 14400 Kbps). Of course it needs modern PC, that isn't good for old PC
So, I am very happy to.read this good news, many thanks.
-
Hello Jean-Pierre,
let me make a final remark on your solution. For me, PTE is a black box. I know its interfaces, how to insert images, how to configure transitions, how to set animation parameters. Furthermore I can look at PTE's output, the preview or an exe-file (I do now use the video stuff). This is what I see, and that's all. I think that your solution would have substantial effects on the internal structure of the PTE software, which is invisible for me as a user. Even if I could look at the design specifications and the source code, this would not help. I am not a software developer with experience in graphics applications.
So I do not feel myself in the position to make any substantial remark on your solution. I'm sorry about that, and I would very glad if future versions of PTE would serve your demands.
Best regards,
Xaver
I have prepared this explanation for the following purposes:
- to give to Igor and the team at WnSoft the details of the formulas that they will need in order to program my algorithm into PTE
- to give to those who currently use Original mode, reassurance that this new method will give the same end result as now
- to give to those who currently use other modes, reassurance that this new method will give the same end result as now
I have made available the following material:
- an Excel spreadsheet file containing the formulas (link here)
- a gif file that is an image of the spreadsheet for those who would like to see the spreadsheet but don't have Excel (link here)
- a zipped PTE project file that demonstrates the result of using v5.52 as we do today and the same result achieved using my algorithm (link here)
- an image made up of some screen-scrapes that shows which fields have been used in the O&A window (see below)
Test of the process :
The PTE project contains pairs of images (#2 and #4, #6 and #8, #10 and #12). Slides #2, #6 and #10 are the ones set up using v5.52 features as we do today. Slides #4, #8 and #12 are the ones set up using my algorithm. This was achieved by entering into the spreadsheet the appropriate values (the same values that we would have entered via PTE if it had the algorithm already built in). I then took the calculated results and keyed those numbers into those fields which are available today in v5.52.
Yes, it is only a simulation of the algorithm but it is, I believe, a very accurate simulation.
Slide #2 demonstrates the result for objects that use "Original mode" as many people use with v5.52 today. Slide #6 demonstrates the result on objects of all three of the modes: "Fit to Slide", "Original" and "Cover slide". Slide #10 demonstrates the result on a rotated object (one object from each of the three modes).
The real test comes from slide #13 onwards. Here I show the pairs of slides, one after the other. The only way you should know when the slide has changed is to watch the number at the top of the screen.
In order not to confuse you with too much information, my examples all have the Level1 object as "Fit to Slide". I have two other spreadsheets that handle the situation when Level1 is "Original" and when Level1 is "Cover slide". I can make these available to anyone who wishes to study them. And I will obviously make them available to Igor and his team.
Using this algorithm and with the virtual Format as parent as explained in post #82, there will be no need for anyone to change anything – so all users should be happy. And there will be only one algorithm to code now and to test in future - which should make everyone at WnSoft happy. Also, we no longer need the "Size/Position…" window! Finally, with this solution, we no longer need point 5 of post #82. Simpler for everybody!!!!
Thanks to Peter to help me for translation
-
JP,
I'm sure that everyone would like to see how the Cale method works on actual images. So yes please, will you post the templates?
It's here with both 5.52 and 5.6 templates
To clarify, these modified tests were done using 5.52?
The 2 examples are with 5.52, 5.6 hasn't original mode, the 5.6 template read only the 5.52 template and I add 2 masks
On the subject of the problems you saw in my full screen test at 1024x768.
Could it be because I used monitors whose NATIVE RESOLUTION is 1024x768 and 1280x1024 whereas you are using the same 2048x1536 monitor to SIMULATE these resolutions?
In my opinion, this is not the same thing.
Tractor 1 works perfectly on monitors whose Native Resolution is 1920x1200, 1280x1024 and 1024x768. I only ever use Native Resolution on all of my monitors (3).
As I wrote before it depend of graphic card, with mine there are the problem I wrote.
DaveG
What would nice is to do the same with V5.6, without needing a Cale and using original mode and position in Pixel without needing a Size/position box.
-
Jean-Pierre,
I have posted the results of my tests here:
http://www.mediafire.com/?sharekey=411ad3b...3a805876665040c
May I say that tables of mathematical data did not convince me that there was a problem – I needed to see the problem with my own eyes with actual images. Manufactured demonstrations using rectangles are also unconvincing. So I set about constructing a test using actual images at "Actual Pixels" (equivalent to Original Mode) to see for myself what the problems are (if any).
DaveG
Dave,
Here are 2 tests with Cale method I did with the template you send me, one is 100% the other 90%. as you can see, it's exactly what you did, I just modify two files in order to have no default, the weight is only 2 722 Kb, I used only JPG, vs 11 715 Kb for yours (made with V5.52).
There were problem with your fullscreen test at 1024 x 768 and 1152 x 864 screen definition and for your 90% screen test a problem at the same screen definition plus at 1280 x 960 (1024)
The two tests I did have no problem from 800 x 600 to 2048 x 1536, I have test them on 10 screen definition. I haven't use 1 pixel more pictures but another way to correct the problem of black lines.
As you also can see, the 90% screen version haven't the problem of objects outside.
What I did would be possible with Fit to slide screen because it's only 2 levels project, but would be more difficult to do than with Cale method, it would be so easy to do as Cale method with the sugestions I did.
I will put the templates if people are interested to see how I did.
File Types
in General Discussion
Posted
I just tried, there is only 1 mp4 that's all for me ?? #15 used